Notes and comments
| Abstract | Imagine that you receive information on the choices made by a decision maker (DM) from all subsets of some set X. You know nothing about the context of these choices. You look for an explanation for the DM’s behavior. You would probably look first for a single rationale explaining the behavior. Specifically, you would seek a rationalizing ordering—that is, a linear ordering on X, such that for every choice set A ⊆ X, the DM’s choice from A is the best element in A according to the ordering. You recall that the “Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives” Axiom (IIA)—which requires that the chosen element from a set also be chosen from every subset that contains it—is a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of such an explanation. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,672 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesRan Spiegler (2001). Inferring a Linear Ordering Over a Power Set. Theory and Decision 51 (1):31-49.
Bairj Donabedian (2003). The Natural Realm of Social Law. Sociological Theory 21 (2):175-190.
David Pincus (1997). The Dense Linear Ordering Principle. Journal of Symbolic Logic 62 (2):438-456.
Walter Bossert (2001). Choices, Consequences, and Rationality. Synthese 129 (3):343 - 369.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads1 ( #274,652 of 549,069 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
